October 11, 2008
Obama, Alinsky, and Gramsci

The truly politically deranged are Alinsky and Gramsci, whose tactics are Obama's. Simply google "Alinsky Gramsci". If you have more time, read the Gramsci chapter in "The Keys Of This Blood," by Malachi Martin. Or you can read the below excerpt from the Spectator.

In her game-changing convention speech, Sarah Palin took a swipe at Obama for having been nothing more in his life than a 'community organiser'.
This prompted the Obama campaign to issue a pained defence of community organisation as a way of promoting social change 'from the bottom up'. The impression is that community organising is a worthy if woolly and ultimately ineffectual grassroots activity. This is to miss something of the greatest importance: that in the world of Barack Obama, community organisers are a key strategy in a different game altogether; and the name of that game is revolutionary Marxism.

The seditious role of the community organiser was developed by an extreme left intellectual called Saul Alinsky. He was a radical Chicago activist who, by the time he died in 1972, had had a profound influence on the highest levels of the Democratic party. Alinsky was a 'transformational Marxist' in the mould of Antonio Gramsci, who promoted the strategy of a 'long march through the institutions' by capturing the culture and turning it inside out as the most effective means of overturning western society. In similar vein, Alinsky condemned the New Left for alienating the general public by its demonstrations and outlandish appearance. The revolution had to be carried out through stealth and deception. Its proponents had to cultivate an image of centrism and pragmatism. A master of infiltration, Alinsky wooed Chicago mobsters and Wall Street financiers alike. And successive Democratic politicians fell under his spell.

His creed was set out in his book 'Rules for Radicals' - a book he dedicated to Lucifer, whom he called the 'first radical'. It was Alinsky for whom 'change' was his mantra. And by 'change', he meant a Marxist revolution achieved by slow, incremental, Machiavellian means which turned society inside out. This had to be done through systematic deception, winning the trust of the naively idealistic middle class by using the language of morality to conceal an agenda designed to destroy it. And the way to do this, he said, was through 'people's organisations.'

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/2073071/revolution-you-can-believe-in.html

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!" Barry Goldwater 1964

Ergo:

Obama, Ayers, Wright, ACORN, et al., are, and have been, engaged in Russian-Gramscian low intensity guerilla warfare and clandestine Marxist revolution against the United States and are de facto illegal combatants, i.e., Outlaws, under the Law of Armed Conflict. As Outlaws they have no Constitutional rights and fall under the jurisdiction of military tribunals, e.g., at Gitmo. Traditionally, Outlaws have been sentenced to indeterminate prison sentences or death.

Obama and his insurgents are grave threats to our national security, and they must be stopped.

Now, stop playing blog games and get busy.

Posted by 1776forgoodmen at October 11, 2008 12:46 PM | Email This
Comments
1. You're an anti-intellectual fool, and a useful idiot for the right. What you have written here demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about... well... pretty much anything.

And claiming up and down that people are "Marxists" and threatening to kill them is tantamount to violent paranoid schizophrenia. You should be stopped given that you're a danger to yourself and to others.

(Of course, I am more of the opinion that you deserve a nice rubber room somewhere!)

Posted by: demo kid on October 12, 2008 08:48 AM
2. kid, the guy has been unvetted up to now. I wish we had more time to vet him, but since your party didn't, he must get vetted. If he gets vetted before the election and is still elected, then what is fair is fair.

But if not and your party sees the things he has done and you aren't happy with him after the election, it is too late. I would rather he be vetted sooner rather than later.

Here's one new one for you and you can prove me wrong, easily (that is if I am wrong). Obama was the editor of the Harvard Law Review. As editor, it implies you work your way up the ladder by writing articles, etc. Well, it appears he never wrote any articles and just 'floated' along. Prove me wrong and point to something the guy has written. And don't give me those two books that he likely had a 'ghost writer' write for him.

Posted by: swatter on October 13, 2008 07:18 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?